And what I think is screamingly clear to me is that your opinion of what is non-offensive or trivial is not something I trust. The only example you appear to use of racism is slavery. Like I said upthread, the people who attack so-called SJWs appear to downplay racism, sexism, and other isms as a relic of the past or just not that big a deal to start with. You appear to be a great poster child of this sort of thinking.
You cannot actually be this stupid. What you are saying here is that citizens of Asian ethnicity in, say, the US are not really Americans, that the United States is not really their country.
By the way, here are two threads for you to peruse:
How many generations does it take before one’s considered American?
So you don’t know what racism is, then? Or social context, for that matter?
A propos of nothing, I was recently reading the blog of a white Japanese (born and raised there, because WW2) and it seems profoundly obnoxious to be him.
Not only do Japanese people always congratulate him for being able to speak Japanese (DUH) and telling him “your Japanese is very good !” 20 times a day then proceeding to ignore anything he says because, well, he’s not really Japanese when it comes down to it is he ? (yes, yes he fucking is) ; but stuff as ridiculous and seemingly innocent like waiters and waitresses asking other people at the table what he wants, because they assume he’s just some baka gaijin who can’t speak the language. Even when he speaks it at them and tells them exactly what he wants, it’s “and what will your friend have ?” or “can you ask him if he wants something to drink ?” until they mentally switch gears, if they ever do.
So, yes, it’s Racist At All. It’s prejudice and bigotry, and it’s exhausting to face it every. fucking. minute. of. the. day. **Nothing **is trivial, because every little sign of exclusion is part of a gigantic, oppressive whole. Racism isn’t racism just when you lynch somebody about it.
Well, yes and no. If you ask them where they’re from and you persist in asking where they’re REALLY from after they tell you “Minneapolis,” yes, it’s racist. But under many circumstances, “Where are you from?” is a perfectly appropriate getting-to-know-you question along the lines of “What do you do for a living?” or “What do you like to do on the weekends?”
But, like what if it’s a really healthy sheep? Or what if, you know, the farmer already has so many sheep he might not even miss this one if you take it?
Or what if you’re lonely?
In that case, FarmersOnly.Com.
Smart ass. 
In today’s Stupid SJW Bullshit O’ the Day:
African-American is racist now. Also, only white people can be racist.
Unfortunately, this leaves the status of these fake race-baiting fliers open to question. Racist? Not racist? YOU decide!
And on a more serious note, from the Journal of Higher Education: The Academy’s Assault on Intellectual Diversity
Literally every post you’ve made for the last six goddamn pages has been a variation on “You’re an idiot for not worrying about the same things I’m worried about”.
Well, allow me to let the New York Times put my concerns in a language you might understand:
How Liberal Colleges Breed Conservative Firebrands. Money quote:
"[Mr Montz] met students who support Mr. Trump “because it’s cool to be hyper-reactionary, it makes them different,” he said. “An easy way to develop a reputation is to be super far-right. And they’re allowed to sit in their largely undercooked beliefs because they aren’t getting really serious pushback, they’re just getting garbage protest hysterics.”
What you persistently (and, frankly, at this point, I believe deliberately) refuse to get is that the vested powers in our culture are emboldened by all this censorious SJW bullshit. This kind of shrieking hysterical “opposition” is, ultimately, the same as no opposition.
But I’m done debating this shit with you. You can say what you like. I’m just going to keep posting more examples of stupid SJW bullshit.
No it isn’t racist at all. Despite your passionate and poisonous rhetoric, there still isn’t any reason to suppose that a friendly inquiry about the ancestry of the person you are having a conversation with is something to be afraid of. None of us have pure origins and none of us should be concerned in the least about whose ancestors traveled where and when.
This may be a big, exhausting problem in Japan or France, but it should not be any trouble at all for somebody who is showing sincere interest in a person that they have just met.
And no, I’m not concerned about what your definition of Racism is; I find that the term has been trivialized enough already.
So if “African-American” is racist, it’s better to just revert to calling them “black,” as the article says? That wasn’t what I was expecting.
But therein lies the minefield of PC-ness: When a certain portion of a population wants you to call them something, and another portion of that same population wants you to call them something else, it becomes almost impossible for even the most well-intended of people to ***not ***offend. When you encounter someone who has a 50% chance of “I prefer to be called X” and also has a 50% chance of “I prefer to be called Y,” what do you call them? You are playing an offense/microaggression lottery.
Well said!
There’s a reasonable argument to be made based on the social context in which that term is currently used, yes.
Anywhere where white people are hegemonic or have been recently enough that the lingering affects of that hegemony are still pronounced, this is indisputably true.
Also, is the poster-sign at the bottom of that article (linked by Rick Sanchez) saying that white people can’t drink Hennessy cognac? I’m really confused, unless Hennessy is primarily consumed by black customers, or something.
So if, for example, five black guys beat up a white guy for being white, is that racism or prejudice?
Beats me. Cognac, like champagne, is so-called because of the region in France where it’s made. If anything, black Americans who drink Hennessy are “appropriating” French culture
[QUOTE=nachtmusick]
…there still isn’t any reason to suppose that a friendly inquiry about the ancestry of the person you are having a conversation with is something to be afraid of.
[/QUOTE]
Way back when, the college interviewer at Harvard was quite interested in finding out where my family came from.
I’m “afraid” that their quota system was still in effect at that time.
I’m going to guess that the people being questioned aren’t concerned about where and when their ancestors traveled.
That’s not a friendly inquiry.
I am tempted to ask whether they were trying to meet their privileged or unprivileged quota, but let’s not spoil the suspense. Quotas are foul regardless of the justification.
I’ve got an idea! You go around with everyone and let them know which inquiries are friendly and which are not! Problem solved!